Psychosocial Pressures in Structural Hierarchies

Background to this Investigation

A large number of taxonomic studies took place between 1980 and 2013. These are posted in the Frameworks prior to Theory section of the website. A number of puzzles emerged during these investigations, but were put to one side.

In 2013, I commenced looking across the various available frameworks to understand these puzzles and formulate meaningful taxonomic generalizations. I was particularly focused on explaining resonance, the similarity of elements with similar formulae; and on understanding connections between some structures and the Root Hierarchy, originally noticed in 2009.

The Architecture Room was created at that time as a place to post investigations and findings. Psychosocial pressures were conjectured at that time, and their role was progressively developed and ultimately assigned to all parts of the Taxonomy. See a full picture here.

During investigation of the Q-expansions in 2022-24, a second psychosocial pressure for each Q-complex became apparent. The original (1°) pressure was essential for the Q-complex (i.e. its identity), but a separate (2°) pressure was in play for operation of the Q-complex.

Subsequently, while developing a structural hierarchy for prospering (PH'6Q4sH), it became evident that a 2° operating pressure could be assigned to groups in a grouping. The previously assigned pressure found in the groupings was the 1° structural pressure.

After some further study, a particular assignation of 2° pressures was settled on. It emerged that the 2° pressure in one grouping becomes the 1° pressure in the next higher grouping and the system is cyclic, G7 leading to G1. The pattern is shown below:

  G1 G2 G3 G4 G5 G6 G7
1°: Identity Autonomy Understanding Performance Certainty Acceptability Well-Being Selflessness
2°: Operation Understanding Performance Certainty Acceptability Well-Being Selflessness Autonomy

While it seemed very likely that both 1° and 2° psychosocial pressures would exist in all structural hierarchies, that principle needed systematic examination. In addition, it was possible that the patterning might differ amongst the variety of structural hierarchies:  Root, Primary, Spiral-derived, or Q-derived.

Conviction about a standard pattern was necessary before developing a possible explanation for the pattern. Why should the 2° pressure in one Grouping become the 1° pressure in the next higher grouping?

Checking the Assignment is Correct

Aside from a few name changes, the various findings in the Architecture Room were not used to "correct" frameworks developed prior to theory. The idea of 2° pressures only firmed up in 2023-2024, and their presence was first located in a structural hierarchy in 2025. While some earlier accounts of structural hierarchies were used to discover the 1° pressures, none were used to determine the 2° pressures.

I selected early structural hierarchy frameworks from the Root Domain: RsH and RsH"; and from all parts of the Primary Domain: Fundamentals, Spiral-complex, and Q-complex.

The AI -assistant was therefore instructed to read these frameworks and determine whether the above 1° and 2° pressures assignments apply.

Scale used in the AI review:

  • Very strong: pressure is explicit or evidently indispensable.
  • Strong: a necessary pressure with no comparably strong rival.
  • Moderate or Unresolved: plausible but not established as dominant.
  • Weak or Contrary: not necessary or another pressure is more suitable.

Full details of this AI investigation (in its own words) have been preserved in my Obsidian notes. Below are the conclusions reached by the AI-assistant.

Readers are encouraged to study the posted material and make their own judgements.

PsH6: Realizing Values

Worked out in the late 1980's and published in 1995 in Working with Values. Development preceded pressure conjectures.

1° Pressures: Very strong or strong across G1-G7

2° Pressures: G1-G2, G4-G7 Very strong: G3 Strong.

PH'1CsH: Expectations of Employment

Posted in 2011. Developed prior to pressure conjectures, but the current account includes some recent taxonomic principles.

1° Pressures: G1-G5 Very strong; G6-G7 Strong.

2° Pressures: G1-G7 Very strong.

RsH: Creativity in Endeavours

Posted 2012 prior to pressure conjectures.

1° Pressures:  G1, G3, G5 Very strong; G2, G4, G6-G7 Strong.

2° Pressures: G1, G5, G7 Very strong; G2-G4, G6 Strong.

RsH": Producing Goodness

Posted 2009-2012 prior to pressure conjectures.

1° Pressures:  G1-G4, G6-G7 Very strong; G5 Strong.

2° Pressures: G1, G5, G6-G7 Very strong; G2-G4 Strong.

PH'5Q2sH: Organising Management

Developed in early 1990's prior to any theory, and posted in 2014 with revisions.

1° Pressures: G1-G7 Very strong.

2° Pressures: G1, G3, G7 Very strong; G2, G4-G6 Strong.

PH'5Q4sH: Shaping Institutional Evolution

Developed and posted 2021-23 with no 1° pressures assigned.

1° Pressures: G1-G3, G5-G7 Very strong; G4 Strong.

2° Pressures: G1, G4- G7 Very strong; G2-G3 Strong.

PH'5Q4sH: Functioning of a Philosophy School

Developed and posted 2021-25, but 1° pressures not explicitly assigned.

1° Pressures: G1-G7 Very strong but not independent.

2° Pressures: G1, G4, G7 Very strong; G2-G3, G5-G6 Strong.

PsH7: Attempting the Impossible

Posted 2025-26 so not independent for either pressure.

1° Pressures:  G1-G3, G7 Very strong; G4-G6 Strong.

2° Pressures: G1, G5, G7 Very strong; G2-G4, G6 Strong.

Conclusion

This AI-assisted investigation strongly supports the current assignment. However, it is not definitive proof.


Originally posted: 15-Aug-2026